An approach to the problem of loess deposit formation: Some comments on the ‘in situ’ or ‘soil-eluvial’ hypothesis

Abstract The problem of loess formation has been widely discussed for a long time and in many languages. At the beginning of the 21st century some parts of this debate are still going on. A case is still being made for the ‘in situ’ approach, and there are problems of terminology and mechanism for the Central Asian loess. Consideration of the origin of loess material has now replaced the discussion on deposit formation as the major ‘intrinsic’ problem, and in the world of ground engineering there is still much investigation on the origins of collapsibility, which is, in effect, a discussion of loess origins. There remain some interesting and useful observations to be made on the North African loess and the loess-like materials in Australia, and the ‘desert’ loess controversy is still running. Connections of loess to chernozems, fragipans and rendzinas are becoming clearer, and it seems that it may be possible to appreciate a loess landscape in which the loess contribution is not immediately apparent. Recent SEM observations suggest that collapsibility develops after metastability—as the ‘in situ’ theory appears to imply.

[1]  W. B. Whalley,et al.  Sources of non-glacial loess-size quartz silt and the origins of 'desert loess' , 2002 .

[2]  C. Rogers,et al.  Hydroconsolidation and subsidence of loess: studies from China, Russia, North America and Europe , 1994 .

[3]  I. Jefferson,et al.  Engineering geology of loess and loess-like deposits: a commentary on the Russian literature , 2003 .

[4]  Andrew Warren,et al.  Aeolian Geomorphology: An Introduction , 1996 .

[5]  J. Wright,et al.  “Desert” loess versus “glacial” loess: quartz silt formation, source areas and sediment pathways in the formation of loess deposits , 2001 .

[6]  C. Vita-Finzi,et al.  The formation of fine particles in sandy deserts and the nature of "desert' loess , 1968 .

[7]  I. Smalley.  Loess Mantle of the Earth and its Properties , 2002 .

[8]  Ian Jefferson,et al.  Silt: 2 62 μm, 9 4φ , 1998 .

[9]  Baron F. Richthofen.  II.—On the Mode of Origin of the Loess , 1882, Geological Magazine.

[10]  I. Jefferson,et al.  Consequences of a modest loess fall over southern and midland England , 2003 .

[11]  A. Goudie.  Encyclopedia of Geomorphology , 2003 .

[12]  P. Márton.  The role of principles and methods in loess-paleosol investigations , 1995 .

[13]  A. Dodonov,et al.  Loess of Central Asia , 1991 .

[14]  M. Pécsi.  Loess is not just the accumulation of dust , 1990 .

[15]  R. Langohr.  Fragipans: Their occurrence, classification, and genesis , 1991 .

[16]  I. Jefferson,et al.  Some major events in the development of the scientific study of loess , 2001 .

[17]  V. Obruchev.  Loess types and their origin , 1945 .

[18]  Ian Smalley,et al.  The engineering geology of loess ground: 15 tasks for investigators—the Mavlyanov programme of loess research , 2004 .

[19]  I. Smalley.  The properties of glacial loess and the formation of loess deposits , 1966 .

[20]  M. Pécsi.  Problems of loess chronology , 1991 .

[21]  C. Rogers,et al.  Fragipan formation in loess soils: development of the Bryant hydroconsolidation hypothesis , 1998 .

[22]  R. J. Russell.  Lower Mississippi valley loess , 1944 .

[23]  J. Wright,et al.  Glacial comminution of quartz sand grains and the production of loessic silt: A simulation study , 1995 .

[24]  J. K. Charlesworth.  The quaternary era : with special reference to its glaciation , 1957 .

[25]  Ferdinand Freiherr von Richthofen,et al.  China Ergebnisse eigener Reisen und darauf gegründeter Studien, , 1877, Nature.